PHILIP MORRIS, INC. VS. FORTUNE TOBACCO CORPORATION (Equal Standing o Int!

"national La# and Muni$i%al La#& FACTS' P!tition!" P(ili% Mo""i), In$., a $o"%o"ation (Stat! o Vi"ginia, U.S.A&, i) t(! R!gi)t!"!d o#n!" o t(! t"ad!*a"+ ,MAR- VII. o" $iga"!tt!). (%!" C!"ti i$at! o R!gi)t"ation No./0123 i))u!d on A%"il 24, /513 67 t(! P(ili%%in! Pat!nt) O i$! (PPO&. Si*ila"l7, %!tition!" B!n)on 8 H!dg!) (Canada&, In$., a )u6)idia"7 o P(ili% Mo""i), In$. i) t(! "!gi)t!"!d o#n!" o t(! t"ad!*a"+ ,MAR- TEN. o" $iga"!tt!) (PPO C!"ti i$at! o R!gi)t"ation No. ///91&. Fa6"iqu!) d! Ta6a$ R!uni!), S.A. (S#i)) $o*%an7&, anot(!" )u6)idia"7 o P(ili% Mo""i),In$., i) t(! a))ign!! o t(! t"ad!*a"+ ,LAR-,. (T"ad!*a"+ C!"ti i$at! o R!gi)t"ationNo. /5:;3& (o"iginall7 "!gi)t!"!d in /549 67 Ligg!t and M7!") To6a$$o Co*%an7&. R!)%ond!nt Fo"tun! To6a$$o Co"%o"ation, a $o*%an7 o"gani<!d in t(! P(ili%%in!),*anu a$tu"!) and )!ll) $iga"!tt!) u)ing t(! t"ad!*a"+ ,MAR-.. P!tition!"), on t(! $lai* t(at an in "ing!*!nt o t(!i" "!)%!$ti=! t"ad!*a"+) (ad 6!!n $o**itt!d, il!d, on Augu)t /0, /502, a Co*%laint o" In "ing!*!nt o T"ad!*a"+ and da*ag!) again)t "!)%ond!nt. ISSUE' >on %!tition!" a) %(il "!gi)t"ant o t"ad!*a"+ "ig(t) in t(i) $ount"7. H!ld' R!gi)t"ation o a t"ad!*a"+ gi=!) t(! "!gi)t"ant (%!tition!")& ad=antag!) d!ni!d non?"!gi)t"ant) o" o"dina"7 u)!") ("!)%ond!nt&. =alidit7 o t(! "!gi)t"ation o#n!")(i% and t(! !@$lu)i=! "ig(t to u)! t(! "!gi)t!"!d *a"+). t(!7 *a7 not )u$$!)) ull7 )u! on t(! 6a)i) alon! o t(!i" "!)%!$ti=! $!"ti i$at!) o "!gi)t"ation o t"ad!*a"+). P!tition!")' )till o"!ign $o"%o"ation) $ondition to a=ail*!nt o t(! "ig(t) and %"i=il!g!) 8 t(!i" t"ad!*a"+) in t(i) $ount"7' On to% o P(ili%%in! "!gi)t"ation, t(!i" $ount"7 g"ant) )u6)tantiall7 )i*ila" "ig(t) and %"i=il!g!) to Fili%ino $iti<!n) %u")uant to S!$tion 2/?A2: o R.A. No. /44 ????????? A!=!lo%!") g"% o $o*%ani!) in$ =) $a t"ad!*a"+) a"! !ntitl!d to !n o"$!

PETITIONER can apply for the registration of the service mark and logo in its nameB
I))u!' >ON

The conflicting claims of the parties to the subject service mark and logo give us the impression that the right claimed by the plaintiff as its basis for asking for injunctive relief is far from clear. The prima facie validity of its registration has been put into serious uestion by the above!stated cases filed by "hangri!#a in the $ureau of Patents three years ahead of the complaint. %hile it is not re uired that &eveloper's claimed right be conclusively established
HELA'

at this stage( it is nevertheless necessary to sho)( at least tentatively( that it e*ists and is not vitiated by any substantial challenge or contradiction( such as has been made by the private respondent. In our vie)( the petitioner has failed to comply )ith this re uirement.
chanroblesvirtuala)library chanrobles virtual

"ection +, of Republic -ct No. .//( providing as follo)s0 "ec. +,. Certificate of Registration prima facie evidence of validity. ! - certificate of registration of a mark or trade!name shall be prima facieevidence of the validity of the registration( the registrant's o)nership of the mark or trade!name( and of the registrant's e*clusive right to use the same in connection )ith the goods( business or services specified in the certificate( subject to any conditions and limitations stated therein.